Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Out of the Blue

Hamm, overslept today in spite of falling off early last night. Not sure what's up with that, it's not like I feel sick or overtired or anything. Oh well, it could have been worse; I could have been awakened by the G-Man, but I wasn't. At least I don't think I was.

"Wake up and smell the.... ashes..."

R.I.P. Dimebag Darrell Abbott. Thanks ASLayerAODsk.

Links of the Day: Make your own Headcrab.
Stories of the Day: Babylon 5 Movie Starts Filming in April.
Police Dog Bites Nude Man in the Genitals. Thanks Bryan.
Jawa in Jersey.
Science!: Concussions Kept Tintin Forever Young - Study (registration required). Thanks Warren.
Getting Burned? Put on a Shirt.
Could Dry Quicksand Explain Desert Disappearances? Could aliens?
Image of the Day: Keek!
Media of the Day: F-Body Fish. Thanks ASLayerAODsk.
Follow-ups: Panel: Robot Won't Save Hubble.
Thanks Mike Martinez and Ant.

View
40. Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. Dec 9, 2004, 15:10 Zathrus
 
but if you give them time & money (probably a lot less than Nasa needs), they can develop the technology to do it

That's nice. Give them all the money you want.

You must have a final solution, ready to go, by 2007. That's the earliest estimate for when the next gyro on Hubble will fail. Once that occurs the bird is (as I understand it) unrecoverable. Scaled cannot solve the numerous engineering challenges in that time frame even if they had the resources to do so -- which they don't. They're kinda busy with the whole private enterprise bit along with Virgin. And if they could solve the LEO problem then there's far more lucrative options than repairing a satellite.

NASA are the only ones who can do it. I guess, in theory, that Russia has the physical resources necessary, but they certainly don't have the money. Nor do they have the right, since it's a US satellite. Europe does not have any manned capability. The Chinese have demonstrated manned flight, but that's all it was -- a demonstration. No real capability there either.

Beyond which, there's a significant question as to the value of the Hubble anyway. Modern ground based telescopes are capable of nearly the same resolution in the visible light spectrum. The JWT, if successful, will vastly outstrip Hubble's capabilities in the infrared and near-infrared spectrum. The only thing we lose is Hubble's UV capabilities -- they cannot be replicated by earth based scopes (there's that annoying ozone layer in the way), and there are no planned space based scopes that will have anywhere near the same capability. If JWT is successful, however, I'd bet the next scope to go up will be a visible/UV one that will outstrip Hubble to the same extent as Hubble outstriped everything else when it finally started working.

Understand, I think NASA should send the shuttle to the Hubble and repair it (as well as install the two modules that are already paid for and waiting for the trip). I think the dangers alleged by NASA's top admin are vastly overblown and a bunch of bureaucratic bullshit. The panel is correct -- sending the shuttle to Hubble is no significantly greater risk than sending it to ISS. ISS is not designed for, or capable of, acting as a lifeboat for the shuttle crew. It's barely even functioning as designed.

 
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
    Date Subject Author
  1. Dec 9, 10:26 No subject nin
  13. Dec 9, 11:27  This just kills me ... BFSoLo.
  16. Dec 9, 11:45   Re: This just kills me ... xXBatmanXx
  2. Dec 9, 10:40 No subject sauron
  3. Dec 9, 10:44 Dimebag will be missed McNublet
  4. Dec 9, 10:45 Not a good day... Zathrus
  5. Dec 9, 10:51 Pantera... Hanover
  8. Dec 9, 11:12  Re: Pantera... AJ
  6. Dec 9, 10:53 Quicksand Zorlack
  12. Dec 9, 11:25  Re: Quicksand xXBatmanXx
  14. Dec 9, 11:31   Re: Quicksand Beamer
  36. Dec 9, 14:29  Re: Quicksand Mr. Tact
  37. Dec 9, 14:43   Re: Quicksand xXBatmanXx
  38. Dec 9, 15:02    Re: Quicksand MrGrosser
  7. Dec 9, 11:01 Another (groin-related) story of the day Jim
  9. Dec 9, 11:12  Re: Another (groin-related) story of the Zathrus
  10. Dec 9, 11:14   Image of the Day Gandhi
  17. Dec 9, 12:04  Re: Another (groin-related) story of the Tango
  18. Dec 9, 12:11   Re: Another (groin-related) story of the Warhawk
  20. Dec 9, 12:31    Re: Another (groin-related) story of the xXBatmanXx
  21. Dec 9, 12:42     Re: Another (groin-related) story of the Warhawk
  22. Dec 9, 12:49      Re: Another (groin-related) story of the xXBatmanXx
  11. Dec 9, 11:21 Dimebag R.I.P Protoz
  15. Dec 9, 11:43 ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait FourPak
  19. Dec 9, 12:29  Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Jim
  24. Dec 9, 12:58   Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait nin
  26. Dec 9, 13:12    Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait xXBatmanXx
  27. Dec 9, 13:30     Flash problems in Firefox.. BicycleRepairMan
  30. Dec 9, 13:39      Pantera BicycleRepairMan
  28. Dec 9, 13:34     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Zathrus
  29. Dec 9, 13:38    Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait  Jereco 
  39. Dec 9, 15:06  Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Yosemite Sam
  41. Dec 9, 15:23   Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait nin
  46. Dec 9, 16:08    Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Yosemite Sam
  47. Dec 9, 16:20     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Zathrus
  51. Dec 9, 16:26      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  54. Dec 9, 16:36      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  62. Dec 9, 17:46       Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Quaternion
  55. Dec 9, 16:38      Re: guns Yosemite Sam
  56. Dec 9, 16:50       Re: guns Enahs
  58. Dec 9, 17:14        Re: guns Yosemite Sam
  63. Dec 9, 17:49         Re: guns Enahs
  64. Dec 9, 18:00          Re: guns Yosemite Sam
  65. Dec 9, 18:07           Re: guns Enahs
  68. Dec 9, 18:20            Re: guns Propagandhi
  73. Dec 9, 18:29             Re: guns Enahs
  74. Dec 9, 18:51             Re: guns AirWreck
  75. Dec 9, 18:54            Re: guns Yosemite Sam
  71. Dec 9, 18:23         Re: guns Warhawk
  80. Dec 9, 23:53          Re: guns MeatForce
  81. Dec 10, 00:35           Re: guns Warhawk
  83. Dec 10, 01:19            Re: guns JediLuke
  88. Dec 10, 07:58             Re: guns Tango
  84. Dec 10, 03:50            Re: guns Propagandhi
  89. Dec 10, 09:12             Re: guns WarPig
  92. Dec 10, 10:44             Re: guns Warhawk
  93. Dec 10, 10:59              Re: guns nin
  97. Dec 10, 14:50              Re: guns Quaternion
  99. Dec 10, 15:15               Re: guns Warhawk
  100. Dec 10, 15:29                Re: guns Quaternion
  101. Dec 10, 17:06                 Re: guns Nemesis
  102. Dec 10, 17:36                  Re: guns xXBatmanXx
  103. Dec 10, 17:46                   Re: guns Nemesis
  104. Dec 10, 21:18                    Re: guns WarPig
  105. Dec 11, 11:31                     Re: guns Armengar
  106. Dec 11, 17:01                      Re: guns nin
  87. Dec 10, 07:44            Re: guns MeatForce
  59. Dec 9, 17:14        Re: guns Zorlack
  57. Dec 9, 17:14       Re: guns Zathrus
  49. Dec 9, 16:25     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  60. Dec 9, 17:25     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait nin
  61. Dec 9, 17:43      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Yosemite Sam
  91. Dec 10, 09:39       Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait xXBatmanXx
  94. Dec 10, 11:06        Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Moonbender
  95. Dec 10, 11:16         Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  96. Dec 10, 14:08         Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait xXBatmanXx
  98. Dec 10, 15:00        Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Quaternion
  77. Dec 9, 19:08      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Zathrus
  90. Dec 10, 09:36      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait xXBatmanXx
  42. Dec 9, 15:29   Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Moog Operator
  44. Dec 9, 15:51    Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  45. Dec 9, 16:07     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait BicycleRepairMan
  52. Dec 9, 16:28      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  48. Dec 9, 16:24     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Tango
  53. Dec 9, 16:31      Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Warhawk
  76. Dec 9, 19:05       Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Tango
  86. Dec 10, 06:44       Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Moonbender
  50. Dec 9, 16:26     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Zathrus
  70. Dec 9, 18:22     Re: ot:Rumsfeld in Kuwait Moog Operator
  23. Dec 9, 12:57 R.I.P. Dimebag "Diamond" Darrel Toxic_Metal
  25. Dec 9, 13:08 R.I.P. Dimebag Darrel Nameless Again
  31. Dec 9, 13:44 Robot Won't Save Hubble. Quaternion
  33. Dec 9, 14:00  Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. Zathrus
  34. Dec 9, 14:13   Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. Quaternion
  35. Dec 9, 14:18    Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. xXBatmanXx
>> 40. Dec 9, 15:10    Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. Zathrus
  43. Dec 9, 15:50  Re: Robot Won't Save Hubble. Jim
  32. Dec 9, 13:57 Zathrus Bronco
  66. Dec 9, 18:11 Riddick Killer Kane
  67. Dec 9, 18:19  Re: Riddick Hump
  72. Dec 9, 18:24   Re: Riddick Ihya
  78. Dec 9, 19:40    Re: Riddick Propagandhi
  69. Dec 9, 18:22 From my cold dead.. Killer Kane
  79. Dec 9, 22:39 Mrow Creston
  82. Dec 10, 01:09 You KNOW I had to say it... Camaro76
  85. Dec 10, 04:33 Rumsfeld Bullshit Hump
  107. Dec 11, 18:04 No subject Malakai
  108. Dec 15, 15:29  Re: No subject Gandhi
  109. Dec 15, 16:38   Re: No subject Malakai
  110. Dec 15, 17:01    Re: No subject Gandhi


footer

Blue's News logo